Case Law Clay v. State

Clay v. State

Document Cited in Related

Jennifer Hernandez, Kansas City, MO, Counsel for Appellant.

Kent Gipson, Kansas City, MO, Co-Counsel for Appellant.

Shaun Mackelprang, Jefferson City, MO, Counsel for Respondent.

Before Division One: Thomas N. Chapman, P.J., Mark D. Pfeiffer, and W. Douglas Thomson, JJ.

ORDER

Per Curiam:

Larry Clay appeals from a Jackson County motion court's denial of his Rule 29.15 motion following an evidentiary hearing. Clay asserts that the motion court clearly erred in denying his motion for postconviction relief, because he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Clay raises two points on appeal. In his first point, he contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to request a self-defense instruction that included "withdrawal" language. In his second point, he asserts that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to request an instruction on involuntary manslaughter. Finding no error, we affirm. Rule 84.16(b).

1 cases
Document | Missouri Court of Appeals – 2021
State v. Pike
"..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 cases
Document | Missouri Court of Appeals – 2021
State v. Pike
"..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex